[bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description Protocols in 360 Degree Review

  • From: "Judy s." <cherryjam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 13:51:52 -0600

Hi Lori,

I think I have a specific real live example for you. It isn't like sidebars. Sidebars, like you said, can just be repeats of what's already in the text. But what I called "parsley pictures" don't even do that. I looked through an American literature textbook yesterday that's to have relevant images described. The page opposite the table of contents page and every page opposite the start of every chapter each had a full page image of a famous oil painting. The paintings had absolutely no connection to the material being presented--none. They were all lovely images, but they didn't relate one bit to anything the book contained, nor was any information or explanation about the paintings themselves given in the book. The images simply acted as a design element to the student to reinforce that they were at the start of a new chapter, and to give them something pretty that drew the eye.

Does that help?

Judy s.

Lori Castner wrote:
Judy, thank you for this explanation, but could someone give me a real live example? I suppose that the comparison would be like "sidebars" that appear in books that use a phrase already given in the body of the text. But what sort of image would be employed in a book? Lori
    ----- Original Message -----
    *From:* Judy s. <mailto:cherryjam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    *To:* bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    *Sent:* Saturday, November 05, 2011 1:25 PM
    *Subject:* [bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description
    Protocols in 360 Degree Review

    I believe the image descriptions Scott is talking about are for
    NIMAC sourced textbooks. smile. So they're looking for
    descriptions for a totally different purpose, to make sure that
    information that's contained in the image and not in the text, is
    available to the student, and the description guidelines are
    related to that.

    A lot of the images that are in the textbooks are just there to
    make a page of text 'prettier' to a sighted viewer, and aren't
    even really related to the text. It's sort of like adding a
    parsley garnish to a plate of food.  The parsley isn't intended
    for eating and doesn't add anything to the flavor, size, texture
    or smell of the meal.  It's totally optional and just there to
    draw a sighted person's eye to the plate and give a visual cue
    that sighted diners may find pleasant. smile.

    Judy s.
    Susan Lumpkin wrote:

    Hi Lori,

    I surely do hope you're incorrect because, if so, several of us,
    both sighted and blind, have spent a great deal of time either
    describing or editing descriptions of pictures in detail in such
    things as figures in a history book or landscapes in a nonfiction
    work or especially pictures in Children's books!


Other related posts: